captions test one two captions test good evening and welcome to the May 28th
Planning Commission meeting will the secretary please call the roll yes
Commissioner Moran here Commissioner count here Commissioner quack here and
chair needing here and for the record vice chair Klopp and Commissioner
Strongman and Commissioner Anderson are absent tonight and they did notify staff
in advance. So we have four and we do have a quorum. Thank you. Thank you. I
don't see anything but just to confirm is there anything on the consent calendar?
Nothing on the consent calendar. Perfect. So there are two opportunities for the
public to provide comment. The first one is during the agenda item as it pertains
to the agenda item. The second opportunity is when it is not on the
agenda item but it falls within the purview of the Planning Commission. So I
I did wanna ask since I see some folks in the room,
are there any public comments that are not on the agenda?
Seeing none, have they,
I wanna ask my fellow commissioners
if there's been any ex parte communication.
Seeing a lot of shaking heads, okay,
then let's move on to item number 4A,
which I believe it has been postponed.
Go ahead.
That is correct.
So we are pulling the cash in short term rental
Y25-105 project off the agenda
and it will be scheduled to a date uncertain.
So it's continued tonight.
Thank you.
Perfect, thank you.
So now moving on to item 4B, application Y2506,
the Crouse short term rental.
Does staff have a presentation?
And before we begin,
I wanted to introduce, wanted to introduce Maley Sheehan.
She is the city's new assistant director
and we are very thrilled to have her
to be a part of our team and also to lead our team.
So please welcome Maley.
Welcome.
Oh, press, nope.
Still learning the buttons.
Anyways, thank you all so much for welcoming me.
I really look forward to getting to know all of you more
in serving this wonderful community.
Well, we're glad to have you here.
Thank you so much.
Okay, good evening, Chair, Vice Chair,
and members of the Planning Commission.
My name is Steven Cook,
Assistant Planner with the City's
Community Development Department.
Before you this evening is a request
for a conditional use permit
to establish a short-term rental
within an existing single-family home
located at 635 Mandarin Lane.
The associated planning application number
is Y25-086.
The project site is located in the northern portion
of the city within the Woodlands neighborhood.
The property is a 12,000 square foot reverse corner lot
with frontages along both Mandarin Lane
and Sugarberry Court.
The site is developed with a single story,
approximately 2,100 square foot residents
and an attached 539 square foot two car garage.
The main entrance to the home is oriented toward and accessed from Mandarin Lane, while
the garage and driveway access are provided from Sugarberry Court.
Surrounding land uses include similar single-family residences, Valley Verde Elementary School
and nearby commercial and community-serving uses.
For reference, the slide includes a vicinity map and an aerial image of the property as
viewed from Mandarin Lane.
Before discussing the project description, staff would like to provide additional background
regarding this application.
On August 5th of 2025, a code enforcement case was opened for the property, following
reports that the residence was operating as an unpermitted short-term rental.
Subsequently on November 6th of 2025, the applicant submitted a conditional use permit
application requesting for an un-hosted short-term rental at the property.
Following the application submittal, additional reports were received by both planning and code
enforcement staff indicating that the property may have continued operating as a short-term rental.
As a result on March 23rd of 2026 of this year, planning staff issued a letter to the property
owner, advising that the online advertisements be removed and noting that the operation without
the appropriate permit constitutes a violation of the city's municipal code. Additionally,
on April 14th of 2026, code enforcement staff issued a separate letter directing the property
owner to remove all online advertisements and future bookings by April 24th, 2026.
On April 21st of 2026, the applicant confirmed receipt of this information.
And as part of staff's due diligence leading up to tonight's planning commission meeting,
site visits were conducted on May 1 and May 18 of this year and during both site visits,
staff observed no active onsite activity during daytime hours.
Transitioning to the project details, the applicant submitted a business operating plan,
which is included as attachment 4, to the agenda report.
This slide summarizes the proposed operational characteristics of the short-term rental.
The property owner would operate as an unhosted accommodation and would be managed by a designated
host rather than the property owner.
The host has been authorized by the property owner to apply for and manage the permit.
The home would be advertised on short-term rental platforms such as Airbnb and Verbo.
Guests would be required to book a minimum stay of three days with stays permitted for
up to 30 days.
In addition, guests must be at least 21 years' age at the time of booking, and to promote
neighborhood compatibility and security, the applicant is proposing security cameras at
the front door, the garage, the backyard areas to monitor for unpermitted guests.
The host would also be available at all times to respond to urgent concerns, including in-person
visits and response if necessary.
Other relevant details are included in the slide below.
The slide includes the property's existing floor plan.
Labeled in yellow is the four bedrooms within the residence.
There's also two bathrooms, a family room,
a living room, and a kitchen area,
as well as an attached two-car garage.
The blue labeled areas indicate the exit and entry points
for the home, including the front yard, excuse me,
including the front entry door, the rear sliding door,
and also the garage entry door.
The project is required to meet
the standard conditional use permit findings
as indicated on the slide.
Staff has included a response to each finding
contained in the draft resolution.
The project has demonstrated compliance
with the city's general plan, zoning ordinance,
and public health and safety requirements.
The project is also required to satisfy the findings
contained within the bed and breakfast in ordinance.
This slide outlines each of the required findings
and based on staff's review,
the proposed short-term rental has demonstrated compliance with all required findings, with
the exception of Finding C as highlighted.
Finding C requires that the length of stay is no longer than one week, however the ordinance
contains a provision in Finding J, again as highlighted, that the Planning Commission
can make an exception to grant a longer length of stay.
Staff believes that extending the approval up to the request of 30 days would not impact
the residential character of the neighborhood and may potentially reduce the number of guests
turnover. It should be further noted if the property was rented for a period of 31 days
or greater, then it would be permitted by right. The project is categorically exempt
per Section 5301, Class I existing facilities, since the project will incur within an existing
home and is not proposing any modifications to the structure or the site. Staff would
also like to note that several public comments have been received and those
comments are included as attachment six of the agenda report. Comments generally
note opposition to the project and express concerns regarding neighborhood
compatibility and overall safety. Staff recommends the Planning Commission move
to determine the project exempt from CEQA, adopt the draft resolution approving
the conditional use permit for the short-term rental at 635 Mandarin Lane
subject to the conditions contained therein.
Okay, and that concludes staff's presentation for tonight.
Staff is available to answer any of the questions
the commission may have.
Furthermore, the applicant, Mr. Krause,
has prepared a presentation and could provide
additional details in regards to the business operation.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Does anyone have any questions for staff?
All right, hi, Steven.
Thank you for the presentation.
It was very informative and it answered a lot of questions
I had coming into this meeting I did want to clarify for it sounds like the
code enforcement was called out to the site to look at the complaints from the
people that filed complaints and so in addition to observing that there was
unformited activity at 635 Mandarin were there any other sorts of observations
that the code enforcement made the oh yeah so yes I did check with the code
enforcement officers and looked at the code case that was open for this project
the most of the concerns raised or neighbors just wanted the city to be
notified that there are unpermitted operations on site that was the primary
primary comments that were received okay thank you they're still operating
without any permits in place thank you I do have a question the bed it the bag
you know what why don't we just we can allow the applicant and then I'll have
questions after that okay so we're gonna open up the public hearing item now and
and that applicant, which you just told me, is here.
I believe we have 10 minutes.
It's 15 now?
It's 15.
My apologies.
You have 15 minutes.
I don't know exactly your title, so city staff,
thank you for having me.
You had the opportunity.
Thank you for being here.
So, on the next 15 minutes I would like to explain to you
how I manage this property
and why it should be approved.
So my objective is for tonight will be kind of like code
instead of the check mark.
So understand the current short-term rental market
in Days Bay and Walnut Creek.
Debunk misconceptions about short-term rental operations.
Understand how technology and experience
eliminates automatically reducing the risk.
Why 635 Manor Lane should be granted a CUP?
I will address any neighbor's concern, and then Q&A.
If required, then the presentation is the business plan
and list of all the requirements
that I was asked to meet for this,
that I met. So I'd like to give an overview of short-term rental in Walnut Creek.
Like any guesses how many short-term rentals operate in Walnut Creek today? Any
guess? Show me a number. Anybody? 30. Anybody else? 173. Not seven hundred
or 173 operate in Walnut Creek today, the 173 short-term rentals they are seven on almond avenue
so this is very important for the city for the city because this brings
close to 800 guests a month to the city guests that go to Robert Plaza have been there downtown
rent cars, they provide 7.3 million of revenue to City of Walnut Creek on a yearly basis.
If short-term rentals will be an issue and there's 170 in Walnut Creek, we would hear about it,
right? You guys will be flooded with funnels, but you don't, because it's a pretty safe operation.
Who remembers when Airbnb and Uber just started? Everybody said, oh my god, who's gonna get
strangers in their cars. Who's going to drive strangers? Who's going to drive strangers to
stay in the house? Yet today the multi-million public company traded with 9 million active
fundamentals worldwide and 10 million Uber drivers. Okay. Why wasn't it a trick, right? When I was
doing my research about where would my mock sense to open a short rental, my son was making fun of
me like dad who the hell is gonna stay at the Short-Term Rental in Walnut Creek? I did
my research so short-term rentals don't host a typical tourist right? Walnut Creek has
your mirror and has Kaiser. Guess I'll stay at my house because family relatives are having
major surgeries. Hotels cannot accommodate that scenario. My very, very first guest actually
finally grew up in Walnut Creek. Mom was in hospice in Walnut Creek.
Kids live in Sacramento, Chicago, New York. Mom was going to die sometime in the next two weeks.
The three siblings and a couple of cousins wanted to have a place to mourn, share pictures, talk,
share memories. Do we expect them to do that at the lobby bar of the Marriott? No!
There's a need for situations like this, right? Other common guests are people that come for
weddings. There's a lot of weddings when you're nearby. Banker of Gardens,
Heather Farms, the Hacienda in Moraga. Families come also to stay when there's
big games, you know, St. Mary's versus Stanford, St. Mary's, Loyola, Burtley versus Stanford, etc.
A short-term rental provides a family environment, provides the feel of
being a home yet not at home.
It's something that a hotel cannot provide, right?
And also people like to stay here,
go to San Francisco as a tourist,
but don't stay in San Francisco
because of some homeless and potential crime issues.
Hotels are also super expensive there.
And people just stay here and go to Nappa.
Okay, all the sea is nearby.
Alamo is a little cocoon, right?
So tiny, tiny, has like two off-ramp on the freeway.
Have nine short-term rentals,
plus then he'll have 82 or in the house 19.
So I said, how many are in one recruit?
How many do you guys think are in the East Bay?
Any guesses now?
There are 5200 short-term mental operating on the East Bay,
which provide $15 million on a monthly revenue
for the East Bay.
These are, talking about examples
of what short-term rental service accommodates.
As I said, the family gathering of a grandma in hospice,
I gave you that example.
I had a family whose wife had major seizure at John Muir.
They arrived three days before the surgery.
What did they say during the surgery?
And then they stayed like a couple of weeks or post-op,
because she needed to go back to John Muir for post-op
short-term drive.
They rented a hospital bed.
to rent a big recliner, no hotel is going to be able to do that.
It provides an environment that helps things, right?
Another real guest of mine was a real mom and his teenage son,
which was terminally ill.
And they were trying a new revolutionary way
to cure whatever the kid had at Delta rates.
They wanted to have a home in their hotel.
They wanted peace.
They wanted a quiet place to stay,
a place where the mom could cook for the son.
That's an actual guess, right?
Hosted some weddings, not a wedding per se,
but, you know, the bridesmaids, and the bride,
and that kind of thing.
That's what I said, but, uh,
uh, uh, family literature, uh, regarding sports related,
for local, local teams.
So, regarding misconceptions about, uh,
short term rentals. Parties, they're not allowed. I mean, to be in the short term rental platforms,
Airbnb, Vibhatsa, you go through a background check. So the identity, who you are, and a
background check is conducted for starters, right? Then the platformers don't allow parties.
Parking. Most people that stay at short-term rentals either Uber or rent mini-mans or SUVs.
I don't think I've never ever have more than three cars parked at the house. Noise. I have
I have a French device called Minute that monitors levels of noise to a certain level
of decibels.
If the noise passes that level of decibels, the device speaks, then you're able to lower
the volume and identification on my phone.
I also have experiences that have cameras on the entry, garage, and backyard.
noise is very under control. Who are the guests? Are they dangerous? Suspicious?
Do we want them running through the neighborhood? I don't accept any guests
that doesn't have a minimum of three reviews with five stars. Since guests are
reviewed and reviews are public on the platforms, guests have very embedded
interest in behaving because in the future a certain mental host is not
going to allow a guest who has bad reviews, right? So you cannot read this
but it's a small fun. But those are reviews of three guests that have stayed with me.
One of them, cannot read for here, one of them has 85 five-star reviews. Another one
has like 30 something and has been on the platform for 11 years. Would you have
any concern as people say no house if 85 people before that have given five
star reviews and have written comments let the house in macula in a macula
ship I will welcome back anytime to eat a house like their own. I won't have any
concern I don't have any concern if those ideas are met. I was talking about nice
No, it's a noise crowd environmental factors.
So I explained a little bit about the mirror device.
It controls, well, the texts.
Noise levels, crowd sizes.
Actually, it tells me how many people are in the house.
It tells me if they're pets.
It tells me people are smoking.
That's more detectors than detect smoking, detect fire.
So it tells me if somebody's smoking.
There's a fire actually connects to the 911
This is a control
So anyway, I don't have four minutes. Okay. So, um, we still only have
Three cameras and I want to address with all respect the neighbor's concern
Public information so I have the actual complaints. I
Need you to make sure to address us. Oh, sorry. Okay. Thank you
like looking at you like this? Us. Just not anybody in the audience. Oh, okay. Beautiful. Thank you. Okay,
thank you for leaving me. Okay, yeah I don't know who's who. Now you know. Perfect. Yeah, continue.
So, Dean McCamish was concerned about closeness to school. When guests book the house, they don't
have the address. They don't know there's a school nearby. And I don't see how this
is relevant. Unknown visitors. I explained that yeah, there's people that may be unknown,
but there are people that have reviewed the state, a dozen support people's short-term
rentals. There hasn't been any concern, but I would not take them, right. They mentioned
dangerous conditions and what would be a dangerous condition. No disturbance. I already talked
about how it's controlled, right?
They're concerned with zoning violations,
the zoning of the house or the neighborhood is not changing.
Parking issues, talk about it.
It's a residential area.
We'll continue being a residential area.
There's not going to be, this is not going to open the door
for hotels and motels to, you know, mop to Sugarberry.
There's no perceived upside for the community.
There's absolutely an upside for the community.
I gave you close to 50 signatures of people
that own businesses or work at businesses on four pluses that are within a half a mile
of the house. And they are in full support of getting approval because they know that
people who are short term rentals eat out more often. They buy whole foods, they buy
a Trader Joe's, they go to have their nails done, they ship stuff at UPS. So there is
an upside for the community. The concerns that Dana Birch had, transient people, yeah,
But they screen people, they have a background check.
They have good reviews.
It's not an area for tourists.
Yeah, the woodlands may be not an area for tourists.
And most people that come are not tourists, as I explained.
Not hotels in Daria.
There's no hotels there, but then there's
a bunch of hotels in Walnut Creek.
There's a demand for that.
I mean, the Hilton Garden was just built recently, right?
No new neighborhoods in the hotel area.
Again, there's two different sonings.
There's no kind of e-hotels that the woodlands are nearby just
because this is approved.
When the oil will have concerns about rezoning,
again, zoning will not change.
The people will be there for the weekends.
Well, no, they're also in weekdays.
Minimum stay is three days.
Party house, again, the platform's done.
Approved parties.
My minimum stay is three days.
So if somebody were to try to throw a party,
that would be pretty expensive to throw a party.
And I explained how noise levels are controlled.
Elaine Coyne said, do you remember
that people have forgotten what happened in Orinda?
What happened in Orinda?
About four or five years ago, a structure
meant in Orinda had a huge party.
There's like 25 people or something like that.
There's a bunch of cars and music and whatever.
Why do we all know about Orinda?
Why do we remember the incidents at Orinda?
Because it's the only one.
There will be instances, negative things happening at Airbnb.
We'll have parties all the time.
We wouldn't remember Arinda, right?
If Columbine would have been the only mass shooting,
we all remember it.
There's one every three days.
So we don't even have to remember which were there.
So we don't remember Arinda because he was a complete outlier.
Elaine also complained that it's about to have
Chick-fil-A in the neighborhood.
Well, Chick-fil-A, that was 15.
The only code enforcement I received was that somebody complained that people
knock at the door of some neighbor house at night to ask for the address.
The house is clearly for Mark with tight numbers and I tried
Apple, Google, Waze and the Redmi Tesla and they put you at the door.
okay so um thank you does anyone have questions for the applicant yes thank you um sure how many
times would you say that the city has asked uh for the listing to be taken down while you were
applying for the cp twice i believe and one thing that i explained to wade i don't know his name
sorry, last name, called enforcement Wade. He sent me screenshots of bookings. I
sent him a screenshot of the platforms showing that I have modified it to
minimum of 31 days and explained to people book mons head, especially
weddings. Like right now bookings for October 27. So what I clarified to him
and he got it is that yes they were bookings for less than 30 days but were
done a while ago, and I see the screenshots of the book is modified to 31 days.
And is it listed currently?
That's 31 days.
Just 31 days?
Uh-huh.
Are you sure?
Yeah, beautiful, yeah.
If I were to show you on my laptop that I could book it right now for a couple days,
would you believe me?
I wouldn't even be an error in the platform because he shouldn't.
Okay.
Because that's what I found.
The platform make errors, like actually they took $2,400 of an account, without a reason,
but if I will call them, because it shouldn't be.
I'm only five.
So, you're saying right now that when the staff asked you to take it down, you made
it just 30 days and more?
If you go to a real boat, you should not be able to book for less than 31 days.
What about Airbnb?
It should not either.
but if you do, I believe you can, I will call them as honestly because that's
a point in their system. Okay, have you had anybody booking just between the
last couple days? For October. Thank you for the presentation, it was very
informative. I did want to understand, so the number 173 short-term rentals, where
Where did that number come from?
I wanted to kind of understand that data point and see.
So there's a website called AirDNA
that groups, gathers all the data from VIRBO, Airbnb,
booking.com, all the different platforms, aggregates
all that data, and you subscribe to it,
because you use it for market research.
So the data is accurate till the day.
It actually is monitored every single day.
For example, Walnut Creek has 5% less short-term renters than last year, but that data comes
from all the different platforms, aggregated data, analyzed financials, logistics and all
that.
It's actual current data.
So to clarify, the time frame would be for one year, 12 months, 173 listings or 173 today?
No, it's today.
three days ago when I put a presentation, so it's operating currently.
Okay, and because it's an aggregate that could mean that they could be double-counting.
No.
So, no, it's not...
No, no, no.
If it's on several platforms, no, it counts as one, because they go by address.
Okay.
All right.
Thank you.
Sure.
Is the property owner here?
No.
But there's a letter that Stephen has saying that he is okay with he doesn't
have anything to do with the letter it does the property owner it's okay with me
far away or was unable to attend for some reason I was told that he didn't
need it to be here and he doesn't have anything to do with the operation it's
just a landlord okay thank you and then my other question is what date did you
first post this online for as a short-term rental? February of 23, and when
I called City of Walnut Creek to ask if there were any regulations for short-term
rentals in Walnut Creek, and sorry, I don't know the name of a woman that
talks, that was W known. There were no regulations. And actually there is an
interview with Chip Griffin which you know had a planning from a interview in
2024 where he says that there was no regulations and one of the quick needs to
get on going with the trends kind of thing and there should be regulations. I
wanted to ask it looks like you've done a lot of research in in your
presentation did you know about the bed and breakfast ordinance and that I'm
trying to figure out because you did a lot of research but you didn't know
about the ordinance and that you needed a CUP when I began again I was told that
there was there's no regulation okay and I was not surprised because there's
series that there's no regulation they don't care just do it right and there's
some different levels of logistics to do it, right?
Yeah.
The only letter that I received,
the only complaint that I received,
or was made aware personally,
was the one about people knocking
at the neighbor door at night.
I never received any other complaint
or identification or anything.
When I began this process working with Stephen,
then he told me about the bed and breakfast.
ordinance regulations. He gave me a list of the things that need to be met to be
approved and all of them were met so the bottom of the presentation so all of all
all that was required by the city to be met it's met. Are there any further
questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you. So, I might have missed this. When have
you discussed the the operations with the neighbors? And no? Or what has their
response been? So I discussed it with a neighbor that lives on the court because
Because he has a short term rental in Sacramento.
I was unpleasantly surprised when I was told that there were six people, six neighbors
complaining, that none of them addressed it with me personally, like several of them had
my business cards.
I talked to a few of them, you know, in and out, driving, doing something in the front
yard or whatever.
And I was planning about thinking about talking to them in the last week or whatever, but
honestly I was kind of intimidated because somebody sent 7 emails to Stephen, right?
So I didn't think that talking to them in person would have been a good outcome, so
That's why I chose to get their concerns
and address each one of them on a slide saying,
hey, let me talk about these misconceptions, right?
There's no reasoning.
There's ways to control noise.
People get scream.
People get background check, that kind of thing.
Good.
Thank you.
Sure.
OK, thank you.
Sure.
You can sit down.
Thank you so much.
I will.
Thank you so much.
Okay, now I would like to open up for public comment
if there is any.
Are there any?
We do, how many?
I have three speaker cards.
Anybody else wishes to speak?
Please fill out a speaker card.
And how many minutes?
Before I get it wrong.
Two minutes each.
Okay, I did get that right.
Two minutes.
Should I?
Yes, please.
Yes, please.
Okay, Jan Warren, please come up.
Jan Warren, I live in the Woodlands, past 40 years.
My neighbor who was, you know, door knocked at 3 a.m., her husband's been in and out of
the hospital four times the past month and she has a daughter-in-law going back to Spain
tomorrow and doesn't get to see her very often, so she declined to come tonight.
But she was the initial mover and shaker here because she sees everything going on.
driveway is across the lawn of 635. So my initial concern was that the city was
not getting revenue from this property and it's still a concern now that I
know how many others there are and it was very frustrating to deal with the
city. You go to the website, you look up a name, you talk to them, and then you
You don't know who's in charge or what, and then you don't hear back, and then you get,
you know, sent to somebody else.
And a lot of this, of course, we didn't know.
I didn't, I mean, I went to city council in August, and then I later sent emails to the
city, and then I followed up this spring.
I don't know why the long delay between the application and May.
I will say, I'll probably run out of time.
weekend we had people who were visiting, or renting, and I went to put my garbage can
out and there was the car. There's a long street, they could have parked it on their
side, it's a public street, but it'd be nice to be thoughtful, allow me in my place, allow
Lisa who lives on the corner and can only park between her driveway and mine a place
to park. A primary question I have is the garage that is labeled as two cars. I've never
seen anyone in there we've heard that that storage or something people can't
really drive in there in Park. I just want everything you know if you got a
construction vehicle put it in there that that can't be there because it was.
Thank you. Jim McCamish. Hello my name is Jim McCamish. My name is Jim McCamish. My wife Jane and I live
of at 714 Mandarin Lane in the neighborhood.
Along with our neighbors,
I have submitted comments to the Planning Commission
on this application and I appreciate the commission
is taking these comments into consideration.
And I would like to have more time,
but I would like to comment very briefly on section 3A
of the draft resolution
considering the CUP permit finding requirements.
And as you know, the code is clear, very clear
that no conditional youth permit may be granted
unless the required findings are made.
And this includes a finding that the use is consistent
with the general plan.
The draft resolution has concluded
that the short-term rental satisfies all
of the findings required by the code,
but I would disagree with respect to item one at section 3A.
The reason given to support a finding
that the short-term rental use is consistent
with the general plan is general plan policy 2.1
to promote Walnut Creek as a regional destination
and policy 1.1 to protect and enhance
the distinctive characteristics of each neighborhood.
And this policy is apparently satisfied
because there will not be a sign posted at the residence.
In my view, these reasons are sufficient in a couple ways.
First, there is no mention of how the short-term rental use
will actually protect, maintain or enhance
the quality of life in the neighborhood
consistent with the vision and the principles
and the goals of the general plan.
And other than not having a sign,
there is really no meaningful explanation
about the short-term revenues
will protect the safety, privacy and character
of our neighborhood consistent with the general plan.
In fact, there really isn't any mention
of our neighborhood in Section 3A at all that I can see.
Thank you. So sorry, Jane McCamish. Thank you.
Hi, I'm Jane McCamish Jim's wife live at 714 Mandarin Lane a few doors down from
635 and I just want to comment on what I've observed over the past year
I've been woken up about three or four times at one or two o'clock in the morning
To loud talking coming from that house
This house, it's a four-bedroom house approximately 2,100 square feet and
It's advertised on VRBO and Airbnb that it can sleep 14 people. It's an awful lot of people the number of cars and the transient
people in our neighborhood the safety issue for the neighbors and
That's along with the concern that this is going to be a party house
So please for our public safety safety don't approve this conditional use permit. Thank you
Sorry, thank you
Are there any questions for any of the public speakers?
No, okay. Now the applicant you have five minutes to come back up here if you wish to be able to
At the end of what I was saying, which I run out of time,
is that it's a five, right?
We're getting it.
Sorry.
Oh, yeah.
I have 10.
No.
So that house would be in a rental house of 14 years, right?
And there's three people, three types of people
could be there, right?
The typical one-year lease tenant, right?
The only criteria that the landlord
cares about renting a house to somebody on a one-year lease
is the credit score and being employed, right?
Those people could be there for a year,
or even after that, where dogs are about 24 hours a day,
they can throw parties every single weekend.
They can change the oil of the cars on the street, right?
There's no filtering, there's no background change,
no criteria.
The landlord cares for credit score and income.
that's it. There's no concern about the neighborhood. I do and the houses are one year rental, hey
they're gonna have it's three feet tall, right? Renters don't really keep the houses
pretty. If you see the house that I manage, it looks like all the houses in the neighborhood.
Free lawn, flowers, drops, trees, clean, well maintained. So the traditional route to one
your tenant I think could be a lot worse. If somebody that came to my house and
knocked at three in the morning somebody's door, I apologize for that, but as I
said I drove four GPS's and they drop you right at the house and the house has
two numbers. So that's benefiting their neighborhood. I think it's really safer
quieter potentially than have somebody with good credit and good knows what
else that family or person would do, right? It clearly benefits the local
community. I have like close to 50 signatures of people that own businesses
or work at Encina Grande, Citrus Marketplace, the Trader Joe's Plaza,
there are four plazas, right? I pay people to clean the house to maintain
maintain the yard. There's a handyman. So if this would not be approved, well, the
wildest of several people would hurt. Mine, I would lose about 50% of my family's income.
I don't know how, I would get that income back. I mean, I would lose my house, basically,
probably, you know, where we live. I mean, it's a significant money generating for me
of maintaining my family so I think and as I said there's many misconceptions
of a short-term rental right again why we all remember as arena because it was
one event in many years I mean there's 10 million Airbnb's in in the world we
don't hear a bronze about that and I have devices for noise control devices
for crowd control Ali very close house is very well maintained everybody that
that goes to house is very well screened and reviewed.
Actually, I considered a very safe and well kept operation
that does benefit from neighborhood
to the community nearby,
the people that work there, own businesses there.
To, as I said, $7 million, $7 million in revenue of Walnut Creek,
770 people benefiting Walnut Creek's community, financials.
So, I think that there's still a lot of misconceptions that are not really, I don't know, not like
well-informed.
I think that, you know, there's like, I don't know, not valid, not what the correct way,
the appropriate way to say it.
So, anyways.
Thank you so much.
Sure.
Are there any comments for the applicant or questions?
Yes.
Thanks, Patrick.
I have a quick question.
It's about the reviews.
So if somebody stays at Gearplace or anyplace in Airbnb,
they probably get prompted to write a review.
What do you think and all that?
How does the timing like that work out?
They have to, we stood it.
OK.
So it's fair to say that if I were to stay at Airbnb
and their review came online two weeks later,
it would stand to reason that I was recently at the Airbnb.
Got it.
Mm-hm.
OK.
Yeah.
Thanks.
Sure.
I wanted to understand a little bit more, so you've gone through quite a bit of detail about the noise monitoring systems and the other cameras.
And so have those been there from when this house started being listed?
The cameras? Yeah. The minute device, just for about a year.
Okay. So the noise monitors are much more recent than the cameras?
Yeah.
Okay.
I mean, with the cameras, you can see how many people are there, but the actual device
that sends a signal to my phone and says, hey, you're being too loud based on the decibel
numbers that I set on the device, on the website device, yeah, but I hear it.
And what led you to include the noise monitors?
Is that in response?
It's not advertising on Instagram.
I was like, oh, looks useful.
So it's not that.
I was not solving an existing problem.
I just saw an advertisement.
I was like, oh, that's pretty cool technology.
Because it's not only noise, but it's not cameras.
I don't understand how it works.
But it tells you how many people are there.
And it also lets you know they're pets.
They document that, I guess, seed.
It is something at a ground level.
So I saw the advertising online.
I was like, oh, no.
It makes sense to have it.
Okay, thank you.
So, I had a couple of questions
and I just caught this and it's something you said.
Do you not live there?
I live seven minutes away with traffic
or three without traffic.
Okay, do you, is this, do you manage multiple Airbnb?
No, just that one.
Just, so you rented this house for the specific reason
to run this.
Okay, and then when the neighbors,
when I think it was Nancy from code enforcement, right?
Cause there had been complaints.
You did not have the noise monitor then?
I don't know.
I don't know how, if I complain we're talking about.
The only complaint.
Even the staff report.
The only complaint I was where I was.
That's why I just, I asked.
Yeah, cause the only complaint I was aware of
is a guest knock at my door late at night.
So I bought a sign with a light to correct that.
And again, I don't understand how that happened,
because any GPS you use puts you right in front of the door.
And if they talk across the street,
especially even versus odd numbers.
OK, well, I think last time I let this up,
Does anybody else have any questions or comments for the applicant?
No. OK. Thank you so much.
I am now going to close the public portion of this and bring it back
to my fellow commissioners for discussions.
So I would just like to talk about how we frame this discussion,
because I think we can go in a lot of different directions here.
And there's a lot of questions about timing or complaints or noise or things like that.
But to me, the sort of bottom line of this is that the request
is for the Conditional Use Permit for the short term rental
for a short term rental that has been operating for years
without a permit.
And in our city, we do have the bed and breakfast
ordinance that we can try to apply to this, but it doesn't match up exactly
because bed and breakfast is generally seen as a hosted scenario and generally
the properties that have been approved under that have been hosted. So I'm
I'm uncomfortable with us as a planning commission
making decisions about a short-term rental,
a specific short-term rental when our city as a whole
has not completed an ordinance
about short-term rentals overall.
There's a lot of things to be considered
in something like that.
Obviously, you know, what are the safety issues?
What are the noise issues?
Should they be allowed in neighborhoods?
Should they be in other parts of the city?
There's a lot of things that I think need to be thought through as a whole city.
So I guess what I would propose to the group here is to consider,
should we be considering this at all at this time,
or should we wait until we allow the city to come forward with an ordinance on short-term rentals?
Apologies, can I interrupt?
So the bed and breakfast in findings,
or even the definition of what a bed and breakfast in is,
there is no criteria or explicit language
that says that it needs to be hosted or unhosted.
So that's really not a requirement
under the bed and breakfast in.
Yeah.
Claire, did you share if I can just add a structural comment?
So the request before the commission is the CUP,
and it's essentially, you can think of it
as the applicant trying to legalize the short-term rental.
And so I would recommend that the commission,
when you were discussing, go off of the findings
that are required for CUP, whether or not
the commissioners think that you can make them or not.
And if not, then I would recommend that you say why,
because before you, there are findings,
there are draft findings for being able
to make the findings for the CUP,
but there's not specifics about the contract.
So I would I would just add that if you're talking and thinking that direction then go off the findings and articulate why that is
the case
I'll jump in and and just
say thank you Commissioner count and I appreciate what you're saying and I
the last time we had to deal with a
Situation like this. I think I said like boy. Oh boy wouldn't be great if the city kind of you know
Picked up their bootstraps and wrote an ordinance, and I think that's probably coming down the road
But I also think that we kind of have to kind of play the hands of her cards were dealt a little bit here
And we I don't want to as much as I agree with what you're saying. I would love to
Everybody that applies for a cup under the bed and breakfast however antiquated that is
We can't wait for the how many years it's gonna take to get an Airbnb ordinance on the books the city
So while it is, you know, we're kind of have to
Make do with the language that we are given. I do think that it
We could make a decision tonight
regarding this specific
applicant I
Well, I've got the mic I have a quick question for staff to the community that right now. Are we just discussing?
So what I want to just understand is the time frame
And I hate to put you on the spot. So the applicant was given notice
As part of the agenda report on March 2025
That they needed to apply for a CUP
They were actually given notice that a CUP was acquired in August of 2025
Okay, where did I see March? Oh March of this year?
Planning wrote a letter to the property owner indicating that
Any continuance of the short-term rental operation is a violation of the municipal code
Okay
Was the applicant told in August of?
2025 that same thing that
Right, so the applicant was told in August of 2025. Hey
You're operating
You know this outside of the the ordinance you need to apply for a cup
And until you do, you need to not have it for 30 days or less.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
And how many times would you say that he-the applicant was informed of-I know you put it
up on a slide, I think it's-I'm actually looking at it, but put that into English for me.
At least two times from the-from planning staff and it appears
at least two times from code enforcement.
Okay.
So a total of four at least.
Okay.
Okay, thank you.
So when I was looking through the findings, I was reading the the resolution and our
Justification for these findings and I found in my opinion that most of these could be made except the one where
The staff highlighted it's still highlighted on the screen
It's the third finding the maximum length of state for any guests. I'll be no more than one week. And this is where I have
some hesitation
Because on one hand
This one we maximum length of stay is creating it does tend to create a more
Increased rate of turnover of guests that are coming to the to the site and leaving
whereas if we were to do the
Extension to the maximum stay of 30 days, which would be an exception under
Section J. That would it could it might not it's not guaranteed to but it could
reduce
The turnover the guest turnover at the site
But because it's kind of a hypothetical we don't really know it depends on the market it's
Our people are actually going to be there for the whole 30 days
Or is that site gonna be mostly for people that are in there for much shorter periods such as weddings or?
business conferences or
they might be vacationing, especially going to the summer.
The 30 days I think is more of the extreme end,
the extent of this day, but I don't,
I couldn't say that that would be the norm.
Whether the 30 days would not
impact the residential character,
I can see the argument for that
because of the lower turnover,
but I think using the exception
for the bed and breakfast inn findings would be more of the,
if we're looking at these conditional use permits
and we're looking at specific findings
for bed and breakfast inns,
we would want to first confirm
that the first nine findings would be there,
and then if we couldn't make them the findings A, C, or E,
then is that exception,
does the benefit of the exception outweigh
the negative impacts of it and I don't feel a strong conviction right now at
this point that making the exception for the the maximum length of stay would
would change the outcome of the of the operations of the Airbnb it could be
short or it could be longer and so at this point I'm still kind of lukewarm on
whether to approve or deny, but I think my lack of conviction does speak to me in some
ways about what action we would take as commission.
Could you go back to the other slide?
So on page three of the Rezo, it says that we need to find that the establishment operation
of the bed and breakfast used will not be detrimental to the public health safety welfare
as a project conforms to the apical land use regulations governing the establishment of
such a use.
I think what I'm having a hard time with is that norm, what I was reading was that this
approval runs with the land, not with the applicant.
And normally in a housing subdivision that we see the applicant subsequently becomes
the owner because of some sort of purchase and sale
option agreement or the like.
And so there is an ultimate endpoint, you know, with that best
intent of map or design review approval that we do.
And here I'm having a hard time because the owner is not here.
And so how will I know that if Mr.
Krauss leaves that since that approval runs with the land,
how is another applicant supposed to determine that there's no public health
safety or welfare? So I can answer that. Page 6 of the resolution, there is a
condition, condition of approval number 14. It says that this used permit shall
remain valid only so as long as the host remains the same individual and entity
that applied for this permit. If ownership of the short-term rental
changes, the authorization for the short term rental
shall automatically expire.
So this one does not run with the land.
So he can't sell his business and that entity
becomes somebody else?
No, it's under this ownership or this authorization.
And if it's any other person besides, I believe,
Hector Cross, who is authorized to operate this business,
will not be able to operate the business at this site.
It would be expired automatically.
That's the condition that's been incorporated.
But I do understand what you're getting at, though,
because we are normally interacting
with the owner in this situation.
And that was something that was referred to as well,
that Council Member Silva had previously
noted that a CUP is normally with the owner.
The other item I'm having a hard time with
is to make the finding when the applicant is currently
in violation of our code.
I think that's the hard part that I'm trying to figure out.
Because in these conditions that you've assigned on page six,
for example, it says maximum guest count of 10 at all times,
I don't see some of this stuff.
I didn't see that consistent with the business plan,
but I could be wrong.
So my question is,
the planning commission has now,
this is the second time where this has come before us.
They've been in violation.
There's been the applicants are astute,
very, very well versed, tons of research,
but then notwithstanding any research that they provided to us, there was an unknown
of the ordinance and then subsequently operating in violation.
So it was almost like coming back here to retroactively.
So I guess the question is, is that is okay for us to do, for us to review findings even
and when an item is in violation,
or do they have to truly take it down,
like what the code enforcement say,
and then we can make the findings?
Well, that's, I guess, part of the consideration
for making the findings because the ordinance is there,
it's a requirement, and so it doesn't preclude somebody
from, for example, if they didn't know about it,
or they were just in violation.
They want to come and legalize their proposal or the use.
So it doesn't, that process itself is not prohibited
under the code.
And so that can't be done.
But again, because the CUP requires these findings,
I think that's a part of the consideration
for the commission about how that would,
how the facts before you and the testimony before you,
how that can lead you to make the findings or not,
or impose conditions and that sort of thing.
So I think my follow-up question to that would be,
can we as a planning commission deny a CUP
based on blatant violations,
knowingly violating the ordinance
after being told multiple times, for example?
Like I can rent this place right now for tonight
for $500 for one night.
And I would say if that's the thought, then again,
the commission should express why it is
that it leads you to not be able to make
one of the findings.
And again, these findings on the screens
are for the breakfast in ordinance,
and so there's the two additional findings
on this page about the CUP,
which ties into the bed and breakfast ordinance.
Sorry, I'm late for a question today, but go ahead.
I will say that as someone who looks at laws and regulations
and helps people comply with them all the time,
it's much better to have the regulatory framework in place
for a non-compliant entity and then say, OK, now
that we have this framework in place,
then we can show you where there's room for improvement.
And so one of the benefits of having the COP
is now the city can point to something
and say that the planning commission has approved
this permit with these conditions of approval,
and then review those and say,
okay, well, are you in compliance
with those conditions of approval,
or do you continue to be non-compliant
with those conditions of approval?
So it adds a little bit more weight having a CUP
that runs with the land,
and I think it hopes to avoid the issue of,
If there is no CUP, then it's the status quo,
which is continuing to operate the short-term rental
without a permit.
Can I just ask, what are the penalties for running?
What are the penalties for running a short-term rental
without a permit?
I mean, you get a warning.
You get told that you should do the thing.
And what actually happens to get fined?
Right, and usually there's a notice violation
from code enforcement, and I think the code,
under the general code enforcement structure
authorizes the city to either file a complaint
or impose fines.
And I think the fines of a set amount,
I think is $100 per violation,
but it's depending on what the city is taking in each instance.
And so, for example, there's most violations
than the penalties that might decide
to pursue those penalties, in those instances.
Versus if you already have a CUP,
and you violate those conditions,
then what are the penalties for that?
You lose the CUP?
Right, yes.
Well, the process is so that the CUP can be reviewed,
reconsidered, and can be revoked.
Right, so the CUP can be revoked
if there's violations of conditions,
and there is a condition now in the resolution
for that to happen, it's number 17.
I have a question about number 19.
It says all outstanding fees owed to the city,
including staff time spent processing this application,
shall be paid in full prior to the instruments
of a site development permit, building permit,
or commencement of the business operation,
including guest stays.
In this case, would those outstanding fees
be for the prior three years
of operating the short-term rental?
applicable fees that that would have been I believe it would be the fees
related to the conditional use permit not the prior operation before the
application was submitted I think I would say it's having the conditional
use permit in place would be more advantageous because then we have a
framework to work with if there continues to be documented non-compliance
then we can go back to the condition 17 which would be coming back before the
commission to review the permit to decide whether to amend those conditions
of approval or to determine what further action there would be would be needed.
And so I think with the benefit of having that framework in place plus the
fact that most of the findings are met could be a net positive for for the
application what I would say is if right now everything is meeting the findings
of the ordinance with the exception of the 30 days then what I'm looking at
because we all read all of the public comments that came in right so we have
that in the back of our head so to your point if we read the conditions on page
Six do we feel as a commission that those conditions address all of the public comments that were received? I
Don't think so. I mean the the issue we have I think is that
That we have regulations. They're not perfect
But it falls to us
As the Planning Commission to be discretionary about how we feel about this without a framework about
CUP or Airbnb
Ordinance that's coming down the road at some point and you know, it's this is going to rely on
Controls from the owner from the applicant and what we've seen over the last since
August of last year is for
instructions to take it down
I'm looking at the
Reviews, and I can see that at least 14 people have stayed there on a short-term basis
during that time I
Don't feel comfortable
Granting in approval tonight just based on
the
What we have been shown and what we are still now seeing to Commissioner Count's point that she could book it right now
And I understand that Airbnb isn't perfect, but I run in Airbnb, and I know that you can control that
So that's where I come down
I would say maybe the place where that fits in in terms of the conditional use permit
findings would be under item number two, that the proposed use including any conditions
imposed will not be detrimental to the public health safety or welfare.
I think I find it hard to accept that finding when we're in a situation of noncompliance.
Go ahead.
other point I would make to the to the point of the conditional use permit is
our decision is not the end of the conversation and so whatever comes after
this you know the the Airbnb or the short-term rental will still be there
it's still going to be the neighbors and the applicant working together to
address the issues that are going on between them and so we are in some ways
one point or one step in this entire process to run a successful short-term
rental business in a neighborhood that doesn't necessarily agree with the
location of that short-term rental and so with respect to public health safety
and welfare the working relationship between the applicant and the neighbors
is a very critical point to examine and I was hoping that when hearing from the
applicant and hearing from public comments that there would be more of a
dialogue about you know how is this short-term rental impacting the
neighbors and less so about you know while economic vitality isn't one of our
priorities as a city and it's good to have it should not be the sole focus of
the short-term rental and the benefits that it brings so I think the the way
that the application was framed was a little too heavy on the economic
benefits and less so on how are we working with the neighbors on this site.
I think there's always room to continue the conversation and that's where I
think this permit would be one step in a long longer process to to obtain the
goodwill of the neighbors and to be a good neighbor yourself as a person
running your short-term rental.
I think the CUP, so the two questions I have are if we don't approve the CUP, then well,
what's going to change about the whole situation?
I think the CUP does give us a little bit more teeth and it gives people that are aware
that there is the CUP, they have the ability to come back and say to the Planning Commission,
hey, look, now that the CUP is here, this is what we're seeing.
Can you review it, suggest modifications, amendments in ways that will help the applicant
of this UP move forward in ways that are more neighborly, I guess is a good word, in a way
that's more neighborly to the location?
So your assumption is that the not owner but operator would continue to operate illegally
this short term rental regardless of what whether there's a CUP in place and therefore
the only way that we can help control that is to offer a CUP which then allows the short
term rental.
I understand that correctly.
I think that's my working assumption I don't because from what I've seen so far the fact
that there hasn't been a permit in place hasn't really stopped the operation of the Airbnb.
still listed on the sites apparently and you're still able to book it so that's
where I think you know if we what can we change about this situation that would
make it hopefully a step in a direction maybe not necessarily the right one but
one that starts the conversation to now that we are in compliance or we have a
permanent place then where do we go from here? 719 where I personally do not from
From what I'm gathering, the applicant lives in Walnut Creek, and so.
I do.
That's kind of what I gathered, or I gleaned.
And so, the applicant has done tons of research, and he now is, he acknowledges the ordinance,
he acknowledges the enforcement that has come through, and it is, and so that's in Walnut
So I do like to believe that once someone has the knowledge of something, that they can subsequently implement it.
The part that I'm having a hard time with is I'm having a hard time making a finding when we're sitting here.
And yet there wasn't that the it wasn't taken down.
I think that's the part that I'm having a very, very hard time with.
with. And so I think what I would be more comfortable with is I think the
business plan is going in the right direction. I think the conditions of
approval are are are while while the ordinance is not super robust there's
always it's interesting and Claire at you as a land use attorney can there's
always an intent behind an ordinance right and unfortunately here the intent
And it's simple, but that's the problem was that it left for a lot of interpretation.
And so I would feel more comfortable is if we started clean.
So if it was truly taken down so that we can be in compliance, and then we can come back
here when it's compliant because it was truly taken down, it shouldn't take that long because
is all of the business plan was put together
to be in compliance with the findings
that are required of us.
To me, that's how I'm seeing
that I can make those findings
by first starting out in a compliant state
because otherwise I'm having a hard time
of how are the requirements of the findings
being able to be met if currently the current requirement
to take it down is subsequently not being met.
Exactly, so normally if you have a CUP,
the threat of not meeting any of the conditions
is revoking the CUP.
We're already in a situation where there is no CUP,
so there's nothing to revoke,
but it feels like it would be a reward
to provide a CUP at this point in time.
And that's where I think my discomfort is as well.
in terms of continuing to get income from this property.
It is still legal to rent for more than 30 days.
You can still hire a gardener to keep up the lawn,
regardless of how long people are staying there.
So there are things that can be done here,
but continuing that if we don't, as a city in fact,
have enforcement for these short-term rentals,
then I think we need to recommend
that the city council look at that as well,
because are we just continuing to allow
these short-term rentals to run illegally across the city
with no repercussions for them doing so?
Just to clarify, so the city is able to enforce the code
and say you're not, you're supposed to get a CUP,
you didn't and so your short term until is not you know and complies as that is
here so grant you see if you would give the property that or the applicant that
right to do it so just just a clarification but nothing was done this
the city didn't it didn't impose any fines when the violation was provided
is that why a bit of conjecture but is that why we think that it wasn't taken
down even though there was multiple notices?
Well, I can't speak exactly to that,
but I think there's some time differences when the applicant came
in trying to get a CUP and the notices went out, and so there's
that process, but the point I'm trying to make is just
that the city still has the code enforcement mechanism,
you know, regardless of whether you have a CUP or not,
but the CUP gives the additional right to operate.
My other question is because nobody I don't think any of us want to deny something that
that is in substantial conformance or meets the findings of an objective standard in this
case an ordinance that has been passed and so how long would it take to come back here
if it was taken down to first be in compliance because at this point the staff report has
been written, the conditions have been made, the findings have been made. I think
that's more of a question for staff. It's not going to take six months to come
back here. So what exactly so you want to see the applicant to come in compliance,
take everything off, the advertisement off, and then come back for
reconsideration of the CUP? Yes, almost like a continued item. I think that's
more on the Commission I mean how much time do you want to because Claire Claire
could it be continued could this be continued to a date certain yes takes
doesn't it take doesn't it take 24 hours to take something down what what about
the concept of denying the application right now and then have it then reapply
the CUP what we can say okay you have a month you have 45 days or whatever and
that's fine but that's not really what we're here to do. Yeah that that's also
an option so the two options that we have are we can continue it to a date
certain is there with a finding that they would have to take it down within
24 hours or deny it that those are the two. If I could have some clarity on the
condition number 16 so this one is the one that says that the you shall be
established within one year of the effective date is that a way to say that
sorry that's condition of approval on page 7 is that a way to say that the
applicant has to substantially comply with the conditions of approval within
one year that is more that may not be very applicable in this case but that is
more for the applicant to pursue the use and so if they got a permit a CUP but
they don't do what they're asking the commission to allow them to do within
one year then we consider that lapse. So maybe another option we
could do is I know in the past when we've looked at permits we can say that
we'll have the permit be valid as long as there's no complaint of non
compliance assuming that the applicant starts clean and then go from there say
for a period of 90 days and then if there is a complaint and code
enforcement goes out and finds that there is no compliance at that time then
the permit would automatically lapse. I'm sorry you're talking about if you the
the commission grants the CUP?
If we approve the CUP, yes.
And then have that condition go in,
it would be valid until a first instance of noncompliance.
So if the CUP is granted, in order to revoke it,
you have to give the applicant an opportunity
to be heard about the revocation.
And so that's why it's a use as granted for the site.
And so the condition wouldn't be able to say
It's going to lapse because there is a complaint,
but you have to find the violation,
and then you have to give the permittee an opportunity
to be heard about whether the permit will be revoked or not.
My concern is this is opening a can of worms.
If we bend over backwards to make exceptions
and create a situation for this particular situation
to be able to move forward, we are sending a message
to the rest of the city that you don't
have to comply with the things that we tell you
are already the ordinance.
You don't have to take it down.
We're sending a message that I think is the wrong message.
I think in order to make sure that anyone who wants
to run a short-term rental properly in the city
needs to do it properly, and they need to take it down
when we tell them to take it down,
not five times, not three months later,
This is not okay.
So I don't think that we need to bend over backwards
in any way for this applicant.
They should have done things right from the beginning.
So with that, I would like to move that we deny
this conditional use permit on the basis
that item two, the proposed use will not be detrimental
to the public health, safety or welfare.
We cannot find that item in compliance.
And I would just add, before there's a second motion,
that if that's the decision of the commission,
I would, because you have articulated reasons why
the commission doesn't think the findings can be made,
but I would suggest that we,
because there aren't written findings
in the record right now for a denial,
that I would suggest that we bring back a resolution
at the next meeting for the commission to confirm
that the findings are, you know, consistent with what you've expressed
in the meeting, you know, consistent with your decision.
That's just to affirm the basis of the.
And and I think
Commissioner Cown it's it's to is to make the application once in compliance.
Could we do that?
Is that is that what the Commissioner Cown could add?
No, I'm not seeking to.
I think her motion is to my motion is to deny.
But what I'm hearing is that rather than actually denying it tonight
we would be asking staff to come back with a resolution that explains the reason for this so you can you can make the
Motion to deny and the Commission can vote on that motion tonight and the decision will be made
but we're just going to bring a resolution back to
Affirm the bases for that decision as reflected in tonight's discussion. Thank you
Our second it and I think that's a great idea
Commissioner count. Yes. Commissioner Moran. Yes. Commissioner Kwok. No. Chair
needing. Yes. Okay. Motion passes. Okay. Now moving on to item 3c. Application
number y 26 0 1 7 location 1534 locust Street for another CUP to extend
alcohol hours does staff have a presentation Oh beautiful good evening
commissioners Simmergill senior planner with the city and we are here tonight to
consider the conditional use permit to extend the alcohol hours at Dar Yesh
restaurant that's located at 1534 Locust Street and just to quickly orient
you with the site the restaurant is located within the Walnut Creek
downtown area on Locust Street it is 1,710 square feet in size and there is
a small 105 square foot outdoor dining area and the surrounding area does
consists of similar restaurant retail-type uses.
The site is owned pedestrian retail, which does allow restaurant uses by right.
And in order to serve alcohol, administrative use permit is required to serve alcohol till
11 p.m.
And tonight the request is for a conditional use permit to sell alcohol past 11 p.m.
And here is the current operations for the restaurant.
The current operations were approved under a administrative use permit.
The restaurant operates under a type 47 alcohol business license.
And the hours of operation are 1130 a.m. to 11 p.m. seven days a week.
Alcohol is served both in the outdoor and indoor dining area of the restaurant.
And outdoor dining permit does limit the alcohol service to 11 p.m.
And the security measures on site include training and certification, the RBS training
required for all employees that are serving alcohol, and a on-site manager is responsible
to oversee the alcohol service and there are security cameras installed in place on site.
So the requests before you tonight are the proposed hours would be extended till 1 a.m.
for alcohol consumption, and the 30-minute last call reflects the 1230 a.m., which is
the end time for the sales and service of the alcohol, however, the consumption will
remain till 1 a.m.
And here are just some site photos and the floor plan to show you the restaurant space,
And the area that I have highlighted blue on the floor plan essentially shows the seating
area.
And then there's a smaller outdoor seating area right in front of the restaurant.
And the security camera locations are provided with that symbol.
Let me see if I could use this with the symbol.
So they do have cameras installed throughout the restaurant at the rear, as well as along
the front entrance and within the restaurant.
So tonight, the Planning Commission, in order to approve this project, will need to make
the standard conditional use permit findings that are listed before you.
All of these findings have been addressed in the draft resolution.
That includes Attachment 1 of your packet tonight.
And the additional findings that the Planning Commission needs to consider are also listed
here.
And again, outlined in or addressed in full detail in the draft resolution.
But I'm happy to go over any if needed.
And this project is exempt from CEQA as the extension of alcohol hours does not expand
the floor area and does not alter the overall restaurant use.
So staff does recommend tonight that the planning commission determine the project is exempt
from CEQA under class section 15.301 and adopt the draft resolution attachment one approving
the conditional use permit allowing alcohol sales and service for the
restaurant till 12 30 a.m. and consumption till 1 a.m. 7 days a week and
that is all I have for my presentation but happy to answer any questions.
Perfect. Thank you so much. Any questions for staff? And the applicant is here
tonight. Perfect. Thanks for your patience.
Just how does this timing match up with the surrounding restaurants nearby the
many of the surrounding restaurants, and I believe it's
Vanessa's bistro as well as
Is that the broader x many of the ones on locust Street do have extended alcohol hours that have been approved and?
Walnut Creek PD is also here tonight, and they have confirmed that this restaurant since they've been operating under the administrative
use permit which is the AUP, there's been no calls for service.
Perfect.
Anyone else?
Nope.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So with that, I'm going to open up the public hearing and if the applicant would like to
come.
You have 15 minutes.
Hello, everyone.
Sorry.
We're good.
Okay.
Thank you.
Go ahead.
I'm happy to answer any question you have.
Oh, okay.
Yeah, me.
Got it.
Okay.
May I ask, has there been just a lot of business and folks that have been, is this like, what
is causing the request?
Yeah, it helps.
Obviously, alcohol is kind of a nighttime.
Customers really like to enjoy their food with their drinks, you know.
And my food is because of the kebabs and grills.
You know, it works very well with the liquor, you know.
Yeah and we lose a lot of customers by having being closed at 11 because we don't have alcohol and those things
It helps the business a lot
okay, anyone else any questions, I
Actually have a question only because when we've approved this it had has come up
It says is live entertainment music dance areas propose
Occasionally not all the time. Yeah, I mean we don't turn our restaurant to a dance floor
You know, we just kind of went there is a birthday party that they want to have it like a solo music or a DJ
For the specific night
Yeah, that's that was me
Okay
Perfect. Yeah, I asked that just because the last time this came that there was a whole thing about dancing and right
Before the applicants is not any questions for the applicant. No, thank you so much
are there any public speakers? I do not have any speaker cards. Okay, so the
applicant, you don't have to come back up here, but you do have the
opportunity. So seeing no other public speakers, I'm going to close the public
hearing portion and I'll bring it back to the Commission for any discussion
questions I feel that it's a very straightforward application so I would
like to go ahead and make the motion to approve the conditional use permit
application y to 6-1 7 as presented I'll second thank you commissioner count yes
Commissioner quack yes Commissioner Moran and chair needing yes thank you
motion passes thank you for your patience okay so now I'd like to move on
to item number five which is Commission considerations anything from staff no
nothing from staff okay then I think we can adjourn thank you so much